GLIDEANGLE

1. Congratulations! Good management of the problem by executing EPs. 2. Yes, I would execute EPs if I had this problem. 3. What this is called does not matter... You had a canopy without proper shape.... The correct response is to execute EPs. 4. This most likely is due to a tension knot. Those will often disappear when the canopy is on the ground and the lines are slack. These are often due to fuzzy lines (excess wear). 5. Not very likely on a reserve (but possible). The inspection standards for reserve canopies are very high and the process of packing reserves is far more careful. 6. I would STRONGLY discourage your attempts to "fix" problems like this rather than executing EPs promptly. There have been FAR too many jumpers who died because they tried to "fix" something for too long. 7. You did well. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Why folks would use a butt landing instead of a baseball type slide on SIDE is beyond me. Regarding how to approach folks..... Ask them questions rather than telling them what to do. That works WAY better. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Regarding the three years experience for tandem instructor rating: 1. This is an FAA rule, not a USPA rule. 2. My view is that there ought to be an alternate path to the tandem instructor rating which looks at measurable skill and knowledge, not calendar pages. I figure that if a jumper had the 500 jumps AND a PRO rating (canopy skills) AND an AFF-I rating (freefall skills) AND a rigger rating (gear).... that ought to be acceptable in lieu of the 3 years experience. What I like about my alternate path is that is is about MEASURABLE KNOWLEDGE & SKILL, not simply the passage of time (with no measurable outcome). I figure that at least we know what the multi-rated guy knows and can do.... "3 years experience" tells us nothing about skills, knowledge, and attitude. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

In the US there is no way to accelerate the 3-year clock for a tandem rating. However, there are lots of other instructional ratings that have no time clock... just do the jumps required. Your budget, time available, and weather will dictate how fast you can qualify for them. If the goal is to make $ jumping, generally you can qualify for a camera flying job long before you have enough time for a tandem rating. Of course, to fly camera or earn AFF-I rating... jump numbers alone are not enough. You must develop the necessary air skills. Everyone learns those at different rates. You might be ready for AFF-I at six hours and one minute of freefall time... or you might need/want a couple hundred more jumps to be ready. If, as your profile suggests, you jump in Michigan; those long winters may slow your pace of gaining jump experience. BTW... Earning a senior rigger rating along the way will help you tremendously with understanding gear and give you another way to make a buck or two in skydiving. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

You forgot: "In freefall: Look at the video camera and smile!" The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Hmm... It appears that Ms. Leopard works for Penn State (thank you Google). Penn State has these relevant clubs: NITTANY DIVERS SCUBA EQUESTRIAN ICE HOCKEY NITTANY GROTTO CAVING ALPINE SKI RACING RECREATIONAL SKIING SNOWBOARDING TRIATHLON Any of the above can get you badly hurt or killed. What makes skydiving so special? In my previous post, I mentioned several stipulations that you might have to accept to reassure the college (AAD, RSL, etc). Equally important, but quite unlikely that the college would understand, or demand, would be a sitpulation to adhere to the USPA wing loading recommendations: SIM § 5-3.B.5: 5. The following are suggested maximum wing loadings based on experience level: a. A and B license 1.0 pounds per square foot (psf) maximum b. C license 1.2 psf maximum c. D license 1.4 psf maximum until demonstrated proficiency under canopy. d. Jumpers should receive formal canopy training and consult with an S&TA before exceeding these recommendations. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

I have to wonder if the school has any of the following: Rock climbing club? SCUBA diving club? Snow skiing/snow boarding club? Football team? Cheerleading team (with gymnastic work)? What is sauce for the goose... is sauce for the gander. Each of the above can lead to serious injury or death. USPA is your ally... don't be afraid to contact them for help with this issue. Consider that you MAY have to agree to some stipulations regarding all club jumping such as mandatory ADD, RSL, and helmet. That may mollify the bean counters. This struggle to get the club started will be GREAT practice for the post-college world. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

In what attitude? The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

What could possibly go wrong? http://www.deltagearinc.com/kit-and-tools/camera-mounts/gopro-low-pro-mount.php The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

The value of USPA membership is NOT mostly in the magazine or third party insurance. The principle value is the role that USPA plays in protecting our ability to skydive in the US. Yep, were it not for the USPA, jumping in the US might well be limited to a very few, very remote places (if it were allowed at all). USPA does a great job of keeping the government out of our business! Take a look at what few REGULATIONS the FAA places on skydivers. That is due to the hard work of the USPA. If you think that USPA BSRs and recommendations are too much.... take a look at the degree of regulation imposed by the British Parachute Association!! In comparison, FAA & USPA have almost no rules at all! BTW... with your short experience in the sport, I suspect that you haven't seen many folks get hurt jumping. Here is the dirty little secret of skydiving in the US..... we have no effective system for counting injuries (and our system for counting fatalities is barely any better). Thus, it appears to new guys and outsiders like skydiving is a whole lot safer than it really is. The number of injures ranging from a twisted ankle to permanent quadriplegia is MUCH higher than it would appear from reading the reports in Parachutist. So, the rules appear excessive..... because the bad outcomes are not very visible. To those of us who have had our friends get hurt or killed in this sport... the perspective is different. Regarding re-currency.... I have done enough ground re-currency training and supervised enough re-currency jumps (and watched videos of others), to know that: A. Often un-current jumpers have lost significant (and important) amounts of knowledge needed to stay safe. Some of the performances by un-current jumpers in the training harness when presented with photos of canopy malfunctions can be quite scary. B. Most re-currency jumps are boring... but some are wild. Instability and loss of altitude awareness can turn a simple jump into a wild one very quickly. The more experience I get as an instructor... the more cautions and skeptical I am on re-currency jumps. Blue Skies, The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

My favorite way to think about reserve canopy sizing is this: If I am unconscious, can my reserve likely land me safely with the brakes stowed and no input from me? (Assuming that I don't hit an obstacle.) This MAY mean a bigger main than reserve! Note that this scenario completely removes your skill level from the reserve sizing equation. A high quality reserve seems expensive until 0.25 seconds after you pull the cutaway handle. See an interesting recent discussion of reserve canopy flight here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4524110;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25; The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

This "first rig" question has been covered repeatedly here in the forums. Try searching for info. Regarding canopy size.... I suggest that you read all 20+ pages of this: http://www.bigairsportz.com/pdf/bas-sizingchart.pdf Also regarding canopy size from the USPA SIM: 5. The following are suggested maximum wing loadings based on experience level: a. A and B license 1.0 pounds per square foot (psf) maximum b. C license 1.2 psf maximum c. D license 1.4 psf maximum until demonstrated proficiency under canopy. d. Jumpers should receive formal canopy training and consult with an S&TA before exceeding these recommendations. 6. Any parachute 150 square feet or smaller is considered a high-performance parachute and falls into the D license guideline regardless of the wing loading. http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section5/tabid/168/Default.aspx#971 Don't miss reading this classic on downsizing: http://www.dropzone.com/safety/Canopy_Control/Downsizing_Checklist_47.html The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Tunnel before FJC is a fine idea. 1. Tell your tunnel coach that you intend to do the AFF FJC later this month. He or she may tweak your training a bit to support AFF. 2. Understand that you may be taught a slightly different way to fly in your FJC. If you won't be able to STFU and do it the way your FJC instructor wants...don't do tunnel first. 3. Understand that while the tunnel is a VERY useful tool.... Free fall is only a part (and not even the most important) of your jump. Death or serious injury in free fall, above deployment altitude is rare. Death or serious injury under a good canopy is all too common. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

I agree with you and DocPop that this is important. The AFFI hole exists mostly now because we have many, many, AFFIs baptised before CC courses became SOP and generally available. Now we have CC courses pretty much readily available. Consider this: So, nowadays, by the time somebody is eligible to become an AFFI candidate, he should have had that canopy course already. But first we'd need to decide just how much and what types of knowledge and teaching skills should an AFFI have. Same as current CC CDs(?) have? More? Less? Specifics? Basics? Advanced? Expert? Then... ...we could one of two things: A. - Have the knwledge and skills taught at the outside CC courses. - Make a CC a prerequisite for AFFIC, and - Have the CC tested for knowledge and teaching skill at the AFFIC, or B. - Make a CC a prerequisite for AFFIC, and - Have this knowledge and skill taught for an instuctor's POV at the pre-course over and above any outside course already taken. - Have it tested at the AFFIC. Me? I like B. - with a test of knowledge and skills at the AFFIC. Question for me is....since the two ground preps do, or at least should, include CC dive flows, how much of that pretty-simple stuff do we rely on as adequate OR do we do more extensive testing at AFFIC? Do you have some other ideas on how to incorporate more CC knowledge and teaching skills into the AFFIC? It's open mic week Option A complete misses the point that knowing how to do something and how to teach, evaluate, and remediate are entirely different things. That is part of why we have a problem with canopy control instruction. This needs to be TAUGHT in the pre-course and evaluated (such as evaluate and remediate a series of video-taped landings) The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Biggest need is to include how to teach, evaluate, and remediate CANOPY CONTROL. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Regarding closing loops that are too short/too tight: Yes, it is probably uncommon... but doing CReW with sub-terminal openings I have had closing loop too tight which resulted in LONG openings. This was because I had switched main canopies and the CReW canopy packed bigger (no D-bag). The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

This might give you a starting place for calculating the costs of routine parts replacement per jump. This combined with a parts price list and a SWAG of the rigger labor cost for each should give you a clue: The expected service life of the Strong Enterprises Dual Hawk Tandem Parachute System components are as follows: Component Expected Service Life Harness/Container/Student Harness 2000 Jumps SET-400-366 main canopy 1200 Jumps Master and T520 main canopies 1200 Jumps Drogue 1200 Jumps Lines on main canopy 400 Jumps Master Reserve 20 Deployments Lines on reserve canopy 20 Deployments above excerpted from page 17 of the Dual Hawk Tandem System Owners Manual http://www.strongparachutes.com/docs/Tandem/DHT_2012.pdf The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

True. However, at my home DZ we often see high density altitude combined with rising thermals.... jumpers under lightly loaded canopies can take FOREVER to descend. This can create serious problems with students' landing patterns carrying them into obstacles because their forward speed continues, despite little doward speed. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

I have to wonder if your "S&TA,DZO,Head Honcho" has an economic stake in you buying these canopies which are too small for you. Are they "right" for you because selling them is "right" for HIM? The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

You are joking. Please tell me you are joking. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

The application is FAR less important than the ceremony. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Yes, this is a dangeours sport! One issue that clouds this discussion in the USA is that we have no meaningful statistics on skydiving INJURIES. Looking only at fatalities tremendously distorts the percieved "safety" of the sport. I know of DZs with tens of thousands of jumps without a fatality.... but with MANY, MANY serious injuries (some resulting in permenant disability). To ignore non-fatal injury allows folks to decieve themselves that the sport is much safer than it really is. Yes, injury is more difficult to measure than the binary outcome of death. However, injury can be measured effectively. The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Ask me next week.... PD will be at the Skydive Dallas American Revolution boogie this weekend. They will have lots of demo canopies for me to try.... On my list: Smaller Spectre (Currently jump a Spectre) Pulse The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Ah, the joys of high density altitude: 1. I was at Eloy for a CReW camp. (My home DZ is ~750 ft elevation) 2. Someone loaned me a Lightning. (CReW canopy with a reputation for "challenging" landings.) 3. To match my WL to the other dawgs.... I was now @ 1.3 instead of my usual 1.1. 4. To improve the Lightning landings, I was told to use double fronts to build speed on final. 5. It was warm at Eloy. Result: To call the landings "sporting" would be a massive understatement! I was delighted to walk away uninjured! The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Spectre is rather tolerant of packing variety. My experience with stuffing the nose is that it resulted in 1400 foot openings. Furthermore....it was unnecessary, my openings were plenty long and smooth with the nose fully exposed. Dacron lines The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!